Comment

Neil deGrasse Tyson: Atheist or Agnostic?

31
goddamnedfrank2/05/2013 10:32:32 pm PST

re: #3 JeffFX

You’re an agnostic atheist if you don’t believe in gods and believe that you can’t know for sure. This appears to be the most rational position.

You’re an agnostic if you believe it’s beyond the capacity of your mind to definitively know the answer. Saying agnostic atheist is like saying Judeo Christian, a transparent attempt to pretend a belief is more inclusive than it really is by appending and superseding another label.

Someone needs to directly ask him if he’s an agnostic atheist, or an agnostic theist.

I don’t get this need to pigeonhole the man according to your own categorical definitions of what these words mean.

It’s weird to see him pretend to not know what Atheist means …

Assuming he’s pretending because his expressed understanding doesn’t line up with yours, that’s an interesting assumption to make.

And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with being an aggressive atheist when religion is so out of hand in this country.

And if it wasn’t out of hand? I don’t get this line of reasoning, justification by forced contextualization. I’d say there’s nothing wrong with aggressive atheism because it’s an honest expression of personal belief, just like agnosticism. They stand on their own. The idea that either of their legitimacies derives reactionarily from overreach by religion is a new one.